how much more can you dehumanize the veep I wonder
― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 16 April 2012 20:15 (1 year ago) Permalink
i have no insight into this at all. rubio seems like an obvious non-pick but i haven't got any better ideas.
― goole, Monday, 16 April 2012 20:15 (1 year ago) Permalink
why don't you send Romney an email?
― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 16 April 2012 20:16 (1 year ago) Permalink
i guess it needs to be someone superficially exciting to the press and more 'substantively' exciting to the base. so yeah rubio i guess.
xp lol
― goole, Monday, 16 April 2012 20:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
I'm looking at that list and thinking "no chance in hell" for pretty much all of them
― mh, Monday, 16 April 2012 20:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
funny the logic of this seems to push toward another "shake things up!!!" kind of pick.
Romney/Arpaio '12
― an independent online phenomenon (DJP), Monday, 16 April 2012 20:19 (1 year ago) Permalink
^^ finally, a ticket we can get behind
― mh, Monday, 16 April 2012 20:20 (1 year ago) Permalink
the prob is he still hasn't won over the base but any pick that will is gonna alienate a lot of people. if he wanted to 'shake things up' and stay on msg he could pick some CEO w/ no political trail maybe. meg whitman woulda been an okay choice if she had won california.
― iatee, Monday, 16 April 2012 20:23 (1 year ago) Permalink
girl power!
Is Jan Brewer a possibility at all?
― Cuba Pudding, Jr. (jaymc), Monday, 16 April 2012 20:23 (1 year ago) Permalink
nooo way
I guess if Romney's interested in frightening the few "Latinos" who'll consider him.
― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 16 April 2012 20:24 (1 year ago) Permalink
Yeah, I guess that goes along with the first sentence in your last post, iatee.
― Cuba Pudding, Jr. (jaymc), Monday, 16 April 2012 20:25 (1 year ago) Permalink
I hate Paul Ryan so much. Even if his politics weren't reprehensible, he's just completely smarmy.
― Respectfully, Tyrese Gibson (Nicole), Monday, 16 April 2012 20:25 (1 year ago) Permalink
Romney/Duffy '12
― an independent online phenomenon (DJP), Monday, 16 April 2012 20:26 (1 year ago) Permalink
idk, my leaning toward Rubio mostly comes from the math of how many Latino votes Romney will need to even have a chance and even though he's never going to convert those kind of numbers, i can still see them going with Rubio to at least keep up an appearance
― heated debate over derpy hooves (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Monday, 16 April 2012 20:33 (1 year ago) Permalink
that kind of calculation betrays a lack of understanding of the (lack of) solidarity of the USA Latino community...which means it's likely just how the Romney camp is thinking
― Euler, Monday, 16 April 2012 20:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
I thought Rubio was already deemned LINO
― mh, Monday, 16 April 2012 20:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
Has anyone any evidence that Rubio's appeal to Hispanics extends beyond Cuban-Americans?
― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 16 April 2012 20:36 (1 year ago) Permalink
can we just put the kibosh on the whole "*INO" thing now
― an independent online phenomenon (DJP), Monday, 16 April 2012 20:36 (1 year ago) Permalink
the prob is he still hasn't won over the base but any pick that will is gonna alienate a lot of people.
this is the beauty of the situation
I think Santorum might have picked Jindal, but I think Romney'll want somebody more Romney-ish - I assume that the party will have figured out that the "match an evidently sane candidate with a totally batshit veep" strategy was a non-starter. McDonnell seems the savviest pick: he's Catholic, southern, ex-military, vocal Romney supporter
― same old song and placenta (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Monday, 16 April 2012 20:36 (1 year ago) Permalink
right, Alfred, that's my point
― Euler, Monday, 16 April 2012 20:37 (1 year ago) Permalink
Romney/Maturo Jr '12
― an independent online phenomenon (DJP), Monday, 16 April 2012 20:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
xpost
yes, please. I figured by using it in the stupidest situations we can get it out of the running
― mh, Monday, 16 April 2012 20:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
Hologram Tupac is the obvious answer
― Jilly Boel and the Eltones (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 16 April 2012 20:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
exactly! i don't think they'll do it because it IS the smart thing to do, they'll do it because they THINK its the smart thing to do.
― heated debate over derpy hooves (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Monday, 16 April 2012 20:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
if this was a poll I'd vote Paul Ryan. he plays to the economy theme and has social con bona-fides over Christie who's squishy on guns and gays
― demolition with discretion (m coleman), Monday, 16 April 2012 21:00 (1 year ago) Permalink
can we not use the adjective "squishy" to describe Christie on anything
― an independent online phenomenon (DJP), Monday, 16 April 2012 21:00 (1 year ago) Permalink
Christie squishy on gays, film at 11
― heated debate over derpy hooves (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Monday, 16 April 2012 21:01 (1 year ago) Permalink
how about gelatinous
― Jilly Boel and the Eltones (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 16 April 2012 21:01 (1 year ago) Permalink
how bout Wellesian?
― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 16 April 2012 21:01 (1 year ago) Permalink
jeezus, and it's only 4 months til the pick is made
― World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Monday, 16 April 2012 21:02 (1 year ago) Permalink
Hmm, maybe he'll pick the person in charge of helping him pick the right person?
― Josh in Chicago, Monday, 16 April 2012 21:23 (1 year ago) Permalink
Sorry, I don't know which current politics thread is the right one, but does anyone else get the impression that all or most of Mitt's battles have been fought for him? I'm never been impressed by the guy on the stump or stage - too much frenzied stammering, unconvincing line readings, poor turns of phrases and avoidable gaffes - but I wonder if all will simply get worse now that the spotlight is his and his alone, let alone once compared with Obama, who thrives on all those rhetorical fronts.
― Josh in Chicago, Monday, 16 April 2012 21:26 (1 year ago) Permalink
Ohio senator Portman maybe not
http://www.ontheissues.org/oh/rob_portman.htm
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/04/10/the-portman-bubble.html
National Journal’s Major Garrett flatly declared that Portman will get the nod, in part because he and Romney have a “genuine rapport.” Garrett acknowledged the downside:
“Portman’s a bore, and their ticket would be boredom squared, or squares squared; he offers nothing to women voters or Latino voters; he carries the taint of Bush-Cheney policies; and he’s not conservative enough for the Tea Party. To one degree or another, these are all valid complaints. But Romney has the same perceived ‘flaws’ and he’s going to win the nomination.”
The Portman boomlet picked up momentum when Politico ran this headline: “Rob Portman tops veepstakes.” The evidence for this? “The name on the lips of most GOP strategists is Ohio senator and former George W. Bush administration official Rob Portman.”
Newsweek’s own Paul Begala was nothing if not definitive:
“You heard it here first: Mitt Romney is going to select Rob Portman, the junior senator from Ohio, to be his running mate…I’m betting that Romney’s choice will reflect who he is: a bloodless technocrat who wants to double down on trickle down.”
― curmudgeon, Monday, 16 April 2012 21:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
"Newsweek's Paul Begala."
― clemenza, Monday, 16 April 2012 21:43 (1 year ago) Permalink
offers nothing to women voters or Latino voters
New GOP slogan.
― Advanced Uncle Meat recovery system (Dan Peterson), Monday, 16 April 2012 21:50 (1 year ago) Permalink
to continue the Hillary 2008: Needs More Kahlua theme from the other head
― Jilly Boel and the Eltones (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 16 April 2012 21:51 (1 year ago) Permalink
not true, Newt will offer marriage and/or yard work to both
xp
― Euler, Monday, 16 April 2012 21:52 (1 year ago) Permalink
GIS for Portman suggests I search for Kelly Ayotte
― boxall, Monday, 16 April 2012 21:55 (1 year ago) Permalink
I like the two gay staffers behind HRC already wondering which hotel room they're going back to
― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 16 April 2012 22:06 (1 year ago) Permalink
what is HRC holding?
― goole, Monday, 16 April 2012 22:10 (1 year ago) Permalink
She's gonna flick a bottle cap at somebody.
― Advanced Uncle Meat recovery system (Dan Peterson), Monday, 16 April 2012 22:11 (1 year ago) Permalink
a popper
― it's smdh time in America (will), Monday, 16 April 2012 22:11 (1 year ago) Permalink
missing a comma
what, is HRC holding?
― an independent online phenomenon (DJP), Monday, 16 April 2012 22:11 (1 year ago) Permalink
The SOS doesn't have all the nuclear codes, right? These photos are starting to make me nervous.
― clemenza, Monday, 16 April 2012 22:12 (1 year ago) Permalink
After a few drinks Clinton is known to chuck D batteries at staffers. [citation needed]
― goole, Monday, 16 April 2012 22:13 (1 year ago) Permalink
lol, these photos are making me wish I'd gone to college with HR because she'd fit right into my peer group
― an independent online phenomenon (DJP), Monday, 16 April 2012 22:15 (1 year ago) Permalink
don't believe the hype
― Euler, Monday, 16 April 2012 22:18 (1 year ago) Permalink
how low can she go?!
― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 16 April 2012 22:24 (1 year ago) Permalink
Quayle was certainly dumb enough to appeal to 1988 Tea Party types.
― KARLOR CAN FUCK ANYTHING! AND HE WILL AND HAS!!! (Eisbaer), Saturday, 11 August 2012 14:20 (9 months ago) Permalink
but at least Paul Ryan knows how to spell "potato" correctly.
Have no idea what Ryan thinks he gains from this. He's giving up considerable power in the House to serve as veep?
But does he have to? Won't he still run for his House seat too?
― something of an astrological coup (tipsy mothra), Saturday, 11 August 2012 14:23 (9 months ago) Permalink
Sure, and I guess when they both lose the race Ryan has more "prestige."
― a regina spektor is haunting europe (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Saturday, 11 August 2012 14:25 (9 months ago) Permalink
Lieberman chose to run for Senate even when he was Gore's running mate ... so yeah, Ryan doesn't have to decline to run for his House seat.
― KARLOR CAN FUCK ANYTHING! AND HE WILL AND HAS!!! (Eisbaer), Saturday, 11 August 2012 14:26 (9 months ago) Permalink
One of the main reasons Bush 41 settled on Quayle was the latter opposing most of Reagan's late term dealing with Gorby.
― a regina spektor is haunting europe (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Saturday, 11 August 2012 14:26 (9 months ago) Permalink
how was Palin in the Biden-Palin debate in '08? are these running-mate debates a big deal? i don't recall hearing about them over here much last time around.
― piscesx, Saturday, 11 August 2012 14:30 (9 months ago) Permalink
repost dirty gif of Biden and Palin during debate plz
― a regina spektor is haunting europe (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Saturday, 11 August 2012 14:31 (9 months ago) Permalink
― spanky hotel frogstrot (how's life), Saturday, 11 August 2012 14:32 (9 months ago) Permalink
By the time of that debate, the Palin bar of expectations had been set so low that all she had to do was not be completely embarrassing for it to count as a triumph. I think the general consensus was that it didn't really help or hurt either of them.
― something of an astrological coup (tipsy mothra), Saturday, 11 August 2012 14:36 (9 months ago) Permalink
so who will Obama pick as veep?
― a regina spektor is haunting europe (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Saturday, 11 August 2012 14:37 (9 months ago) Permalink
biden was really good in the debate, he said some plainly heartfelt things about his family which made palin's bear mama (or whatever it was ...) rhetoric look patently empty. the story was just 'palin fails to embarrass self', though
― thomp, Saturday, 11 August 2012 14:43 (9 months ago) Permalink
(xpost) Yes--although she still managed to fall short of those abysmally lowered expectations. I feel like I should apologize in advance for knowing this, but Biden was the "winner" in all the post-debate polls by about a 2-1 margin. On the other hand, she did get off one immortal line: "Mind if I call you Joe?"
― clemenza, Saturday, 11 August 2012 14:44 (9 months ago) Permalink
It'd be fun to use that line in real life with some of you. "Mind if I call you Thomp?" "Mind if I call you Schlump?" "Mind if I call you A Regina Spektor Is Haunting Europe?"
― clemenza, Saturday, 11 August 2012 14:48 (9 months ago) Permalink
My secret hope for this is that educating the public about Ayn Rand will turn into her becoming this election's Jeremiah Wright. WHY WON'T RYAN DENOUNCE HIS EXTREMIST IDEOLOGICAL MENTOR?
VP debates were handily Biden's but yeah, the CW was that Palin needed to not come out in clown makeup reciting nursery rhymes backwards, so it was a "win." Biden did have that alternately cringe-worthy/heartfelt speech about his roots. (Jon Stewart: "Oh yeah, Sarah Palin? You're from one shithole town? Joe Biden's from four."
― Doctor Casino, Saturday, 11 August 2012 14:53 (9 months ago) Permalink
Back to back:
Maybe until you're actually elected it's hard to get your head around the idea that the next president might be you.
― clemenza, Saturday, 11 August 2012 14:55 (9 months ago) Permalink
And, if you're running for President, you're constantly hearing people introduce someone on stage (you) as "the next President of the United States!" Could imagine that just getting lodged in your head.
― Doctor Casino, Saturday, 11 August 2012 14:58 (9 months ago) Permalink
A simple explanation that makes perfect sense. Don't think it's a coincidence, though.
― clemenza, Saturday, 11 August 2012 15:02 (9 months ago) Permalink
considering that ryan is one of the new breed of "professional catholic" politicians his devotion to a notorious atheist is ripe for picking apart
― (REAL NAME) (m coleman), Saturday, 11 August 2012 15:02 (9 months ago) Permalink
yeah if ayn rand does come up its gonna be in the context of IS THE REPUBLICAN PARTY BEING RUN BY ATHEISTS
― iatee, Saturday, 11 August 2012 15:03 (9 months ago) Permalink
Frum's thing is pretty interesting--#4 is LBJ's inside-pissing-out theory:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/11/paul-ryan.html
― clemenza, Saturday, 11 August 2012 15:10 (9 months ago) Permalink
who SHOULD have mitt picked?
― balls, Saturday, 11 August 2012 15:44 (9 months ago) Permalink
lol frum was damn near apopleptic about this pick last night - https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/234147333850406912
― balls, Saturday, 11 August 2012 15:46 (9 months ago) Permalink
Max Twain@MaxTwain
@davidfrum We get it, you are petrified to defend conservatism. That's why you are so comfortable among the Deweys/Fords/Doles/Bushes #tcot
― a regina spektor is haunting europe (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Saturday, 11 August 2012 15:48 (9 months ago) Permalink
#3 on that frum list was my first thought when i saw the pick -- the most obvious-seeming answer to the who is this for question, right? it's not really for "the base" cuz the base hates obama so much that romney shouldn't have to worry about them; it's not really for "swing voters" because this isn't the guy to get them; but the kochs of the country, the ultrariches with their heads stuffed full of rand, love this guy (the natl review had a hilarious piece where they said ryan was just the kind of brilliant analytical "uber-competent thinker" romney would have hired at bain; he's a ceo's idea of a genius) and w romney's numbers slipping i thought maybe he was hoping for a huge cash injection from a newly enthusiastic plutocracy. who knows tho right.
― a hauntingly unemployed american (difficult listening hour), Saturday, 11 August 2012 15:48 (9 months ago) Permalink
anagram fun - "Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan" -> "Immoral Ayn Rand-type nut"
― (500) Days of Sodom (Merdeyeux), Saturday, 11 August 2012 19:39 (9 months ago) Permalink
awesome!
― Simon H., Saturday, 11 August 2012 19:49 (9 months ago) Permalink
the most obvious-seeming answer to the who is this for question, right?
Duh, it's for the good of the country, and, by extension, the good of the whole world.
― Josh in Chicago, Saturday, 11 August 2012 20:20 (9 months ago) Permalink